Immigration,
particularly illegal immigration, is a big issue due to the rounding up of
criminal illegal aliens and deporting them. In defense of illegal immigrants,
Democrats often cite the Bible. I am a firm believer in scripture study and
living according to the teachings of the prophets. However, I do not believe in
misquoting or abusing scriptures.
James Hoffmeier noted that secularists and
liberals rarely consult the Bible when making policies, and they “reject the
Bible’s teachings on same-sex marriage, abortion, and trans ideology.” He said
that he was surprised when the same people regularly cited the Old Testament
while defending illegal aliens and/or sanctuary cities.
As an Old Testament scholar, I was first
intrigued by the fact that the Bible was even being used in the immigration
debate, and yet I knew that the Bible was not being read seriously….
Three important questions must be raised
before one attempts to apply Israelite law to the modern situation:
1. Was there such a thing as territorial
sovereignty in the second millennium B.C. when these laws originated?
2.Within that socio-legal setting, what
was a “stranger” or “sojourner”?
3. How does one obtain this status?
Regarding the first [question], the answer
is unequivocal.
Nations small and large had clearly
recognizable borders, typically demarcated by natural features such as rivers,
valleys, and mountain ranges, much as they are today….
Wars were fought over
where boundary lines would be drawn, and forts were strategically placed on
frontiers to defend the territory and to monitor movements of pastoralists.
Permits akin to the modern visa were
issued to people entering another land…
Secondly, what about the “stranger” or “alien”?
The Bible is not “a living, breathing
document” that can mean whatever you want it to say. The question must be
answered contextually and based on what the key words meant when they were
written before we apply what that might mean in our own times.
The most significant Hebrew word for our
discussion is ger, translated variously in English versions, which
creates some confusion, as “stranger” (KJV, NASB, JB), “sojourner” (RSV, ESV), “alien”
(NEB, NIV, NJB, NRSV), and “foreigner” (RNIV, NLT). It occurs more than 80
times as a noun and an equal number as a verb (gwr), which typically
means “to sojourn” or “live as an alien.”
The problem with more recent English
translations (e.g., TNIV and NLT) is that they use “foreigner” for ger,
which is imprecise and misleading because there are other Hebrew terms for “foreigner,”
namely nekhar and zar. The distinction between these two terms ger
is that while all three are foreigners who might enter another country, the
ger had obtained legal status.
There are several episodes in the Bible
that illustrate how a foreigner became a ger.
The individual or party had to receive
permission from the appropriate authority in that particular culture. Perhaps
the best-known story has to do with the children of Israel entering Egypt.
In the book of Genesis, we are told of how
during a time of famine in Canaan, the sons of Jacob did the natural thing
under the circumstances – go to Egypt, where the Nile kept the land fertile.
Even though their brother Joseph was a high-ranking official who had
recommended to Pharaoh that they be allowed to settle in the northeast delta of
Egypt, they felt compelled to ask Pharaoh for permission….
Here we notice that they declare their
intention “to sojourn” (gwr) and deferentially they ask “please let your
servant dwell in the land of Goshen.” No less authority than the king of Egypt
granted this permission.
This means that the Hebrews, though
foreigners, were residing in Egypt as legal residents, gers.
[Hoffmeier’s second story was about Moses
was granted permission by Jethro to become a “sojourner,” “stranger,” or “alien.”]
Moses was thus able to call himself a
sojourner (ger), not a foreigner (nakhiriyah) land. Gershom, his
son’s name, contains the word ger, reflecting his change of status.
From the foregoing texts, we can conclude
that in the ancient biblical world, countries had borders that were protected
and respected and that foreigners who wanted to reside in another country had
to obtain some sort of permission in order to be considered an alien with
certain rights and privileges….
Finally, a brief word on the biblical
practice of sanctuary….
Once again the conditions for sanctuary
protection are plainly stated. “These six towns will be a place of refuge … so
that anyone who has killed another accidentally can flee there” (Numbers
35:15).
Sanctuary, then, is explicitly a place to
get a fair hearing in the case of accidental death, but for no other crime. The
cities of refuge were not a place to void trial or punishment.
American cities that use their communities
to circumvent the law to help the illegal alien in the name of justice are
doing a gross injustice to the letter and spirit of the biblical law.
I
left out most of the article, but I highly recommend it for anyone interested
in immigration and/or sanctuary cities. As he explains it, Democrats, Leftists,
or others have no ground to quote the Bible in support illegal immigration or
sanctuary cities.
